.051 



■--^f^ p^. ^. ^. 



THE WAR \VIXH SPAIN. 

STAND BY THE PRESIDENT. 



SPEECH 



OF 



Hon. marlin e. Olmsted, 






DEIvIVERED IN TnS 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 1S98. 



1S9S. 

3^. v^.-s. 









4* 



V 



o 



n 



SPEECH 



OP 



HON. MAELIIS" E. OLMSTED. 



The House being in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, an(3 
having under consideration the bill (H. R. 10100) to provide ways and meang 
to meet war expenditures- 
Mr. OLMSTED said: 

Mr. Chairmax: The clistiDguished gentleman from Ohio [Mr. 
Lentz] who has just taken his seat has informed this House and 
the country that a gold dollar held in front of the eye obscures 
everything else from sight. All the iniquities which he claims to 
have discovered in this war-revenue measure he attributes to that 
fact. I would suggest for his consideration the proposition that 
for properties of obscuration the honest little gold dollar is not 
comparable to the free silver coinage theory which proposes to 
impose upon the country silver dollars worth 45 cents each. 

The 45-cent silver dollar held up before the optics of gentlemen 
upon the other side of the House seems to shut out and utterly ex- 
clude those rays of common sense which if permitted to enter would 
at once show the wisdom of the propositions contained in this bill. 
It proposes that a part of the revenue necessary for the conduct 
of the war with Spain shall be raised by present taxation, and the 
balance by the issuance of 3 per cent bonds. Against this latter 
proposition the gentlemen who have spoken to-night upon that 
side of the House have particularly urged their strenuous, vehe- 
ment, and unreasonable objections. 

I venture the suggestion that if this bill provided for the free 
coinage of silver, and made the bonds payable in silver dollars, 
which, at the present market price of that commoditj', would bo 
worth about 45 cents each, not one of these objections would have 

come from that side of the House. No, not even if the bill re- 
SJli 3 



4 

quired the immediate issue of a thousand millions of such bonds. 
Why, Mr. Chairman, the silver dollar held before the eyes of the 
gentlemen upon that side seems so to obscure their vision that 
they are utterly unable to read, much less fairly interpret, the pro- 
visions of this bill. 

Mr. ROBB. I should like to ask the gentleman a question. 

The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Peansylvania 

yield? 
Mr. OLMSTED. Yes. 

Mr. ROBB. I should like to ask the gentleman if he means by 
that statement that these bonds to be issued are to be paid in gold 
and in gold alone? 

Mr. OLMSTED. I will answer the gentleman by referring 
to the arguments which have come from that side of the House 
to-day. The language of the act is that they shall be paid in coin. 
The fear which has been publicly expressed to-day and to-night 
upon that side of the Chamber is that the money of the United 
States will be kept so good, as it is to-day, that every dollar of 
our money will be worth a dollar in gold, and that therefore, sub- 
stantially, the bonds will be paid in gold. They will be paid in 
dollars that are as good as gold. That is the theory, and that is 
the moving inducement to the gentlemen upon that side of the 
House to oppose this bill. 

Mr. VANDIVER. I should like to know upon what authority 
the gentleman makes the statement that there would not be ob- 
jection on this side of the House if the bonds were to be made 
payable in silver? 

Mr. OLMSTED. That is the logical conclusion to be drawn 
from everything that has been said upon that side of the Chamber 
since this bill has been under discussion. 

Mr. VANDIVER. That depends upon the logical condition of 
the mind that draws the conclusion. [Laughter and applause on 
the Democratic side.] 

Mr. OLMSTED. That is the conclusion which will be drawn 
by every logical mind in the United States, which considers the 
illogical objections which the gentlemen upon that side of the 
Chamber have urged against the adoption of this most necessary 
and urgent war measure. [Applause on the Republican side.] 

o3U 



Gentlemen upon this side of the House are willing and anxious to 
bear, and bear now, all reasonable burdens of (Jovernment and 
all reasonable burdens incident to the great emergency now upon 
us; but why shall the people of this country be compelled to raise 
by taxation, in one year, or in two years, the enormous sums 
necessary to defray all the exi)enses of the war? 

Why not raise part of the money by the immediate sale of bonds, 
which bonds can be paid off at a later period and by a lower rate 
of taxes spread over a series of years? We are fighting not only 
for the glory and honor of those who live and pay taxes to-day, 
but also for the glorj' and honor of those who will be living and 
who will be paying taxes for some years to come, and they may 
as well pay part of this expense, as we are now paying part of the 
expense of the last war. 

Mr. VANDIVER. Will the gentleman yield for a suggestion? 

Mr. NoKTON of Ohio also rose. 

Mr. OLMSTED. One at a time. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman yields to the gentleman 
from Missouri. 

Mr. VANDIVER. I would just simply say that we adhere to 
the principle that we are re3i>onsible for this war; that it is on 
us, and that we propose going on the principle that we pay as we 
go; and if we can not pay as wo go, we will quit going. 

Mr. OLMSTED, If wo were to enact a revenue bill based 
upon the principles advocated by you and others upon your side 
of the House, wo would have to quit very soon. We would have 
to quit before we got to going" at all. At the very outset of the 
war we would find ourselves unable to pay and therefore unable 
to go; unable to go on with what we have already begun; unable 
to pay for the ships; unable to pay for the guns; unable to pay for 
ammunition; unable to pay for fortifications; unable to pay the 
eoldierswho are already volunteering in response to the President's 
call. This country, instead of going forward to glorious victory, 
would be compelled ingloriously and at once to surrender all for 
which its land and naval forces have already been called into 
action. 

Some gentlemen upon that side of the Chamber seem determine*! 
to destroy the credit of the Government by com.pelling the use of 



fiat money to bring about that result. They have opposed every 
reasonable method which has been suggested for the raising of 
the sinev/s of war. The gentleman from South Dakota, I thiak it 
was, who endeavored this evening to make it appear that this bill 
is framed in the interest of the rich as against the poor. He stated 
boldly that it imposed a tax upon the beer of the poor man and 
none whatever upon the wine of the rich man. The rich will 
drink more of the beer and pay more of the beer tax than will the 
poor. The tax, hov/ever, will fall upon the brewer and not upon 
the consumer. A glass of beer will still be sold for 5 cents. 

The silver dollar in front of his eye so obscured and shortened 
his visual range that he seemed absolutely unable to read that 
provision found on page 41, wherein wines of every kind are di- 
rectly and distinctly taxed to an amount equal to $4.80, as against 
§3 upon beer; and he titterly forgets that wines are already taxed 
ten times as heavily as beer. Why, even water — mineral water, 
the table water of the rich — is taxed at a higher rate than beer. 

And who, let me ask, will pay the stamp tax imposed in Sched- 
ule A upon bonds and debentures, certificates of stock in corpora- 
tions, and on all transfers of shares of stock in corporations? 
Who will pay the stamp tax upon bank checks, drafts, certificates 
of deposit, bills of exchange, letters of credit, brokers' notes, 
memoranda of sales of stocks upon exchanges, notes of hand, etc.? 
And Y/ho will pay the tax upon telegraphic and telephonic mes- 
sages, the tax upon corporate mortgages, warehouse receipts, and 
all the other various items found in Schedule A, which, according 
to the estimate of the distinguished chairman of the Ways and 
Means Committee, will produce more revenue than any other sec- 
tion in the bill? 

These taxes will be paid by persons of wealth, or at least by per- 
sons who are well to do. They are not the character of taxes 
which will fall upon the toiler in the mines, nor in the workshop, 
nor upon the railroad, nor at the plow. The bulk of these taxes 
will be paid by people of means. 

The gentleman from Ohio also endeavors to make it appear, con- 
trary to the fact, that champagne is treated more tenderly than 
"beer. If he will offer an amendment providing that every man 
who drinks a bottle of champagne shall pay a war tax of $1, 1 will 

33J1 



support it, and in that particular will give him credit for the 
greater degree of patriotism, because I think that he will pay a 
great deal more of the champagne tax than I will. 

One gentleman who spoke this evening opposed a tax of 1 cent 
on telegraph messages, because it might happen that some poor 
man sending a telegram to his dying mother might have to pay 
that cont. 'Statistics show that nine-tenths of all the people of the 
United States do not send telegraphic messages at all, or at least 
very rarely. The other tenth who do send them are merchants, 
brokers, bankers, corporations, and business men generally. And 
the same is true of express packages. No form of tax that could 
be de>ised would fall more lightly upon the poor than the taxes 
\>r' >{>■ '?.<A in this bill uix>n the business of express companies, tele- 
graph companies, and long-distance telephone companies. 
Gentlemen with the silver dollar before their eyes are unable to 
" - advantages of this form of taxation. They oppose the 
, .. 1- , ..ion to raise part of the war revenues from such sources 
and part from bonds, and what do they propose instead? Why, 
a tax on incomes. I am not hero at such a time to object to such 
a tax if it could be collected. But the Supremo Court of the 
United States has already declared it to be unconstitutional. 

Gentlemen upon the other side have clamored for war in season 
and out of season. They endeavored to force the country into 
when wo were without ships, without guns, without ammu- 
w. . ;n,and without adequate coast defenses. They endeavored to 
force US into war without first exhausting the diplomatic means 
-. ; .h modem civilization requires shall first be exhausted in an 
effort to avert armed hostilities. They endeavored to drive tho 
country into war at such time, upon such pretext, and in such 
manner as would have condemned our action in the eyes of na- 
tions other than Spain and have embroiled us in difficulties with 

them. 

Tho gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Lf.ntz] in particular demanded 
instant war and scnrrilously and outrageously abused and vilified 
President McKinley and charged him with the basest motives in 
his endeavors to avert war and to maintain peace with honor. 
Now that war has come, how do the gentleman from Ohio and 
others upon that side propose to pay the expense? Why, by reen- 

33U 



8 

acting a statute that has already been declared invalid and under 
which not a dollar of revenue has been or can be raised. 

But, gentlemen say, the Supreme Court of the United States 
was wrong in its decision. The Constitution of the United States 
provides that Congress may not levy direct taxes except in pro- 
portion to the population. Gentlemen say that that is unfair, be- 
cause the population in Pennsylvania may be wealthier per capita 
than the population in some other States. Their quarrel is with 
the Constitution. Congress has no power to set that instrument 
aside. 

The Supreme Court held, among other things in the income-tax 
cases, that a tax upon the incomes derived from land, for instance, 
is practically a direct tax upon the land and therefore prohibited 
by the Constitution. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bailey] , 
the Democratic leader, spent nearly an hour yesterday in an en- 
deavor to show that when rent has reached the pocket of the land 
owner, it is no longer land or real estate, but is money, and there- 
fore may be taxed. 

Similar sophistry was indulged in by learned counsel in the 
famous Passenger Cases, reported in 7 Howard. The tax in ques- 
tion was imposed nominally upon the passengers, but the court 
held that it was a tax upon the vessel. Mr. Justice Grier, who 
delivered the opinion, said: 

We have to deal with things as wo flud them, and we can not change them 
Ly changing their names. Can a State levy a duty on vessels engaged ia 
commerce, and not owned by her own citizens, by changing its name from a 
"duty on tonnage" to a tax on the master, or an impost upon imports by 
calling it a charge on the owner or supercargo, and justify this evasion of a 
great principle by producing a dictionary or a dictum to prove that a ship 
captain is not a vessel nor a supercargo an import? 

Many years ago the State of California levied a tax upon bills 
of lading for the shipment of gold or silver out of the State. The 
Supreme Court of the United States held in Almy vs. State of 
California (24 Howard, 169) , that although nominally upon the 
bill of lading, it was in substance a tax upon the thing exported 
and therefore void. Chief Justice Taney, who delivered the opin- 
ion, said: 

A tax or duty on a bill of lading, although differing in form from a duty on 
tiiQ article shipped, is in substance the same thing. 

In the more recent case of the Philadelphia and Southern Mail 

3314 



Steamship Company vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (122 
U. S., 326) the same court decided that a tax upon gi-oss receipts 
derived from interstate or international commerce was a tax 
upon the commerce itself. In Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 
vs. Western Union Telegraph Company, a case which I had the 
honor to argue. Chief Justice Fuller delivered his first opmion 
after appointment to the bench in support of the proposition that 
a tax upon receipts derived from interstate telegraph messages 
was, in effect, a tax upon the messages themselves. 

In the famous case of the State tax on foreign-held bonds, re- 
ported in 15 Wallace, at page 300, reversing the supreme court of 
Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court of the United States held that 
a tax of 5 per cent imposed upon the interest upon corporate 
bonds was in substance a tax upon the bonds themselves, and 
therefore invalid as applied to bonds held by nonresidents. Upon 
this point the decision of the court in the income tax was in har- 
mony with its previous rulings and with common sense. 

If you tax a man upon the rent derived from his farm because 
EO derived, or if you tax him upon aU the wheat raised upon a 
certain farm because raised upon that farm, you will have diffi- 
culty in convincing him that his farm has not been made the sub- 
ject of taxation. The gentleman from Texas admitted that income 
derived from the interest upon a municipal bond is a tax upon 
the bond itself. How, then, can he argue that income which 
consists of rent from a farm is not a tax upon the farm itself? 

But, we are told, there have been changes on the Supreme 
Bench, which now contains two justices who did not iiarticipate 
in the former decision, and that possibly upon a rehearing under 
a new statute the court might come to a different conclusion. 
They propose, therefore, to reenact thafrtax and rest the success 
of our armies and navies upon the hazard that the immutable 
principles of law may be changed, or that the Supreme Court 
may change its mind. They propose to say to our brave soldiers 
and sailors, "Go ahead and fight, and wo will pay you when the 
Supreme Court of the United States reverses itself." 

There is no assurance and, indeed, no prospect of any such rever- 
sal, and it would in any event take the greater part of a year to 

get a test case into that court for its decision. That is the way 
33U 



10 
the gentleman from Missouri intends that we shall "pay as we 

go." 

Gentlemen who voted freely to issue 4 per cent bonds in time of 
peace will now vote against 3 per cent bonds to meet the exigen- 
cies of war unless they are made payable in silver. How would 
that work? "Who would buy the bonds, and what would we get 
for them? If you want an example of the free-silver theory as 
applied to government indebtedness, turn to Mexico. Upon every 
Mexican bond held by a nonresident that Government has to pay 
in interest the equivalent of $12 in silver upon every hundred of 
princij)al. 

We propose to borrow money at 3 per cent, and to do it by 
making it payable, principal and interest, in money which shall 
be kept as good as gold. We propose to make this a popular loan. 
The bonds are to be for $25, or multiples thereof, so that all the 
people may be taken into the partnership and have an interest in 
the Government and in the war. 

The silver question before the eye of the opposition so blinds 
their judgment to all the dictates of patriotism, statesmanship, 
or even common business sense that they oppose this proposition 
and propose to destroy the credit of the Government, make its 
bonds utterly unsalable, and prevent it from raising the necessary 
funds by making them payable in silver or else defeating the issue 
entirely. And this they call paying as we go. 

Mr. Chairman, this country, after four years of hardship and 
distress, was fairly entered upon a course of unexampled prosper- 
ity. I was not one of those who sought to drive our people from 
the downy bed of prosperity to the ' ' flinty and steel couch of 
war"— war, with its sad concomitants of debt, taxation, devasta- 
tion, and death. I was one of thoss who voted and who labored 
in season and out of season to sustain the President in his patri- 
otic efforts to accomplish, without recourse to arms, all that hu- 
manity and a just regard for the dignity and honor of our flag 
required should be accomplished. 

I voted for the House Cuban resolution because it left still an 
opportunity for an honorable, peaceful solution, which I hoped, 
almost against hope, might yet be accomplished. I voted against 
the Senate resolution because it would have closed the door ut- 

3314 



11 

terly to further diplomatic negotiations, and because it proposed 
to recognize as an independent government, entitled to a place 
and standing among the nations and governments of the earth, 
the present so-called republican government in Cuba. 

I was opposed to such recognition because there is no stable and 
fixed government there to be recognized; because President Mc- 
Kinley had advised against such recognition; because, in my judg- 
ment, the power of recognition is vested by the Constitution in 
the President and not in Congress, and because such recognition 
would substantially have placed the Army and Navy and Treasury 
of the United States at the service of a handful of men over in 
New York known as the Cuban junta. Should we now recognize 
that as an existing government? Then, in accordance with inter- 
national law, when our armies land upon Cuban soil or our navies 
arc in Cuban waters, they must fight under the Cuban flag and be 
under the direction of Cuban oflBcers. 

Our own gallant commander, Major-General Miles, the hero of 
a hundred battles, with Brooke and Merritt and Lee and Wheeler, 
or wliomsoever may command our forces in Cuba, must serve 
under direction of Gomez, who, brave though he may be, has 
never in his life handled as many as a thousand men in one en- 
gagement. I opposed such recognition because, if treated as an 
indci)endent government, the ten or a dozen men who control the 
affairs of Cuba might at any time conclude on their own account 
a treaty of peace with any other nation or even with Spain lier- 
Bolf, whereby the United States would be left entirely out in the 
cold and bo placed in a very equivocal condition, diplomatically 
and otherwise. 

Even France, when she recognized our independence in the war 

of the Revolution, insisted upon a previous agreement that we 

would not make peace with England without her consent. And 

yet it was proposed absolutely and without condition to recognize 

and treat as an independent sovereignty a govermcnt which Con- 

STil-General Leo testified before the Senate committee was nothing 

"except the skeleton form of a government— a movable capital," 

a capital which, according to the testimony of a Cuban officer, 

consisted of three houses and eight inhabitants, the controlling 

spirits of that government residing in the city of New York. 
8CU 



12 

This testimony of General Lee was given April 12, 1898, before 
the Senate committee. It ought to have put an end at once to 
any thought of such recognition. But the gallant general was 
too popular. His reception by the country upon his return from 
Cuba was too much in the nature of an ovation. His name was 
even suggested as a possible Democratic nominee for the Presidency. 

That did not suit William J. Bryan and the free silverites, and 
so it happened that at a banquet held in this city on the evening 
of the 13th of April, at which leading Senators and Members were 
present, Mr. Bryan declared that that government ought to be 
recognized, and after a speech by my friend the gentleman from 
Arkansas [Mr. Dinsmore], and upon a motion put by him, it was 
unanimously resolved that those present at the banquet, repre- 
senting, as it was claimed. 6,000,000 voters who supported Bryan 
and the free-silver cause, should insist upon the Senate resolution, 
and thus some Senators who otherwise would have opposed it 
were brought to its support. 

But, happily, we were enabled to defeat that clause; and now 
that we must fight, we will fight in Cuban waters and upon Cuban 
soil under our own beautiful and glorious banner, and under the 
direction of our own commanders. And when we have accom- 
plished the noble purposes for which we fight we shall be in posi- 
tion to make peace tipon our own terms. American citizens have 
been confined in Spanish prisons without cause, and indignities 
have been heaped upon others. 

Our officers and representatives have been treated with scant 
courtesy. The property of American citizens upon the Island of 
Cuba has been destroyed without compensation. Our trade has 
suffered. Our commerce has been injured. We have been com- 
pelled for a long time to keep men and ships constantly employed, 
at great expense to our Government, to prevent American citizens 
from aiding the Cuban insurgents, in violation of neutrality laws. 
Our humane efforts to feed the starving on the Island of Cuba 
exasperated the Spanish people. 

The irritation increased until finally, on the night of the 15th 
of February, while our battle ship Maine was lying peacefully at 
anchor at a buoy designated by the Spanish authorities, 258 
American seamen and officers, sleeping under the American flag 



in a supposed friendly port, were, by the explosion of a subma- 
rine mine, hurled instantly into eternity, and the costliest and 
most perfect war ship the world has ever seen, the pride of the 
American Navy, was sent, a tangled mass of wrecfege, to the 
bottom of the foul harbor of Havana. 

With a patience for which they deserve inexpressible credit, the 
American people, stunned and shocked as they were by this awful 
crime, awaited patiently the result of a judicial investigation. 
But before it was received they were still further appalled by au- 
thentic reports and detailed narratives of crimes committed by or 
in the name of the Spanish Government upon innocent noncom- 
batants, mostly women and children, upon the Island of Cuba, 
almost under the shadow of the Stars and Stripes, which for cold- 
blooded and hellish ingenuity of planning, success in execution, 
and extent of resultant suffering and death exceeded anything of 
which the present generation has ever heard or read. 

Think of 300,000 deliberately herded together like cattle, pre- 
vented from obtaining the necessities of life, and doomed to die 
by slow starvation, more than 50 per cent of their number having 
already thus perished. The food contributed by charitable Amer- 
icans or purchased by money appropriated by the American Con- 
gress, the reconcentrados were not permitted to cook, because 
they were not permitted to obtain the necessary fuel. 

The reports of our consuls showed such a frightful state of facts 
that our Government, for a time, withheld them from publica- 
tion until they were verified from other sources. When the re- 
port of the court of inquiry upon the Maine disaster was made 
known and the people became gradually acquainted with these 
further crimes against humanity, there came swelling and surg- 
ing up to Congress the voice of seventy millions of indignant and 
outraged American citizens, demanding action. In response to 
the demand of tho President of the United States, the Spanish or- 
der of reconcentration was nominally revoked; and yet the recon- 
centrados were not permitted to depart. 

Tho Spanish Cortes pretended to appropriate a large number of 
pesetas (equal to .$000,000) to their support, but not a peseta ever 
reached them. These facts and the discovery of the De Lome let- 
ter showed the duplicity and the insincerity of Spanish dealing 
83U 



14 

and Spanisli promises. Then the President of the United States 
demanded that the Spanish troops should be withdrawn from 
Cuba and the people of that island be permitted to take care of 
themselves. The only reply was the recall of the Spanish minis- 
ter from Washington and the discharge by the Spanish Govern- 
ment of the American minister at Madrid. 

Thus were all negotiations ended between the two countries. 
The Maine is unavenged and unapologized for. The same revolt- 
ing crimes against humanity are continued in Cuba, and every 
possible insult has been heaped upon our people, who have borne 
much and suffered long. And so it came about that both Houses 
of Congress unanimously declared war, and that war has existed 
since Spain literally threw in the face of the American people the 
ultimatum which the President by order of Congress had sent for 
her consideration. 

The patriotism of the American people is stirred to the highest 
pitch. The different parts of the country vie with each other in 
patriotic offerings. It is a magnificent spectacle — that of this re- 
united country. Men who wore the blue and men who wore the 
gray in deadly combat against each other now march shoulder to 
shoulder against the common enemy. The services of brave and 
gallant generals of the late Confederacy are freely offered to the 
Government and I hope may be accepted. 

It is the duty of the Government and the desire of the people to 
bring this war to a glorious and triumphant end as speedily as 
possible. To accomplish that purpose large sums of money are 
necessary and must be raised quickly. The people demand this 
and they will not be slow to punish those who, for the hope of 
gaining some slight party advantage, strive to weaken the hands 
of the Administration by withholding from it the financial sup- 
port of which it is in such immediate and urgent need. 

The CHAIKMAN. The time of the gentleman has esnired. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



11 II 



iiiyiiiii iiiiiiiiii I 

013 902 143 5 • 



mm 
ill 





